We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Barclays accounts closed
Options
jimquk
Posts: 8 Forumite
Hi
I assist asylum-seekers and refugees. One of my clients, who has been given refugee status, had her cards swallowed by the ATM on a Saturday evening. She went to the branch on Monday, and was handed a copy of a letter dated that Saturday giving formal notice that her accounts would be closed after 14 days, saying they were "unable to explain the mechanics of our decision".
I went with her to the branch, where the manager eventually called the relevant department. Infuriatingly, he said that they had explained in general terms what the problem was, but he could not divulge it.
He concurred that the accounts appeared to have been run quite acceptably, with regular usage, an increasing balance, and no failed payments, penalty charges, etc.
He advised that we get a credit reference agency report (pending); he suggested that the bank may have received information from another source (Police, etc), for instance that the young lady had criminal or even terrorist associations; he said it could even be a friend of a friend, which leaves the field pretty wide open. He confirmed that if there is such information, it could make it difficult to get an account anywhere.
He made it perfectly clear that it was most unlikely that the bank with give a substantive response to any letter of complaint. However, we have written to them complaining about their relying on secret and uncontestable information, advising them that we will follow up their (non)-response with the local MP.
The young lady, who I am 100% confident is innocent, and who is struggling to establish a new life in this country, has been left very upset and depressed.
Unfortunately, her ID documents are currently back with the Home Office, making it impossible for now to open any other bank account. (This was also an issue in getting her funds back from Barclays, luckily the branch manager was able to authorise a payment).
No doubt the bank will respond referring to their rights according to the T&Cs, but I think their attitude is extraordinarily high-handed - all the more so in that, as a taxpayer, I have contributed to the "implicit guarantee" all UK banks are benefiting from.
I've noticed a few other threads with similar stories. I will update you with any progress.
I assist asylum-seekers and refugees. One of my clients, who has been given refugee status, had her cards swallowed by the ATM on a Saturday evening. She went to the branch on Monday, and was handed a copy of a letter dated that Saturday giving formal notice that her accounts would be closed after 14 days, saying they were "unable to explain the mechanics of our decision".
I went with her to the branch, where the manager eventually called the relevant department. Infuriatingly, he said that they had explained in general terms what the problem was, but he could not divulge it.
He concurred that the accounts appeared to have been run quite acceptably, with regular usage, an increasing balance, and no failed payments, penalty charges, etc.
He advised that we get a credit reference agency report (pending); he suggested that the bank may have received information from another source (Police, etc), for instance that the young lady had criminal or even terrorist associations; he said it could even be a friend of a friend, which leaves the field pretty wide open. He confirmed that if there is such information, it could make it difficult to get an account anywhere.
He made it perfectly clear that it was most unlikely that the bank with give a substantive response to any letter of complaint. However, we have written to them complaining about their relying on secret and uncontestable information, advising them that we will follow up their (non)-response with the local MP.
The young lady, who I am 100% confident is innocent, and who is struggling to establish a new life in this country, has been left very upset and depressed.
Unfortunately, her ID documents are currently back with the Home Office, making it impossible for now to open any other bank account. (This was also an issue in getting her funds back from Barclays, luckily the branch manager was able to authorise a payment).
No doubt the bank will respond referring to their rights according to the T&Cs, but I think their attitude is extraordinarily high-handed - all the more so in that, as a taxpayer, I have contributed to the "implicit guarantee" all UK banks are benefiting from.
I've noticed a few other threads with similar stories. I will update you with any progress.
0
Comments
-
As with any business, banks can choose their customers. If they don't wish this person to be a customer then so be it.0
-
Fair enough, but why open an account, let it run for a year, and then close it just like that?0
-
-
Degenerate wrote: »It's not as simple as that. Ask the couple who ran a B&B and thought they could choose only heterosexual customers.
How about the couple who ran a B&B and decided that all customers would have to be 21 or older as they found under 21's to be loud and often not pay the fees before they left?
Barclays are not choosing their customers on their sexuality, their choosing their customers on who is going to be most profitable and unfortunately those with a high chance of fraud or those who are linked to fraud or other such activities that are unprofitable will not be able to stay customers with the bank.0 -
unfortunately those with a high chance of fraud or those who are linked to fraud or other such activities that are unprofitable will not be able to stay customers with the bank.
Yes, but how is an innocent person to rebut an allegation which is kept secret? Why shouldn't Barclays disclose whatever information they believe they have?0 -
One thing that comes to mind here, is that under money laundering regulations it's a criminal offence to "tip off" anyone that an investigation is being performed into their activities. You aren't allowed to inform them about it, and if they ask you basically have to lie and/or say "it's a secret".
Not that I'm implying that's what's happened here necessarily, but there is at least one area of financial regulations where you're required by law to keep your motives secret. I'm not familiar with banking-specific regulations, but it doesn't seem infeasible that there are several possible situations that could elicit a similar restrait on the bank's ability to share information.0 -
Degenerate wrote: »It's not as simple as that. Ask the couple who ran a B&B and thought they could choose only heterosexual customers.
OK I shall reword:
Banks, as like any business, can choose their custom as they please, as long as their reasons for not are not on discriminable grounds.
OK for you pedant?0 -
OK I shall reword:
Banks, as like any business, can choose their custom as they please, as long as their reasons for not are not on discriminable grounds.
OK for you pedant?
And how are we to know that Barclay's decision wasn't based on unjust discrimination when they refuse to reveal their reasons?0 -
Degenerate wrote: »And how are we to know that Barclay's decision wasn't based on unjust discrimination when they refuse to reveal their reasons?
You don't, but that's the same with any business, not just Barclays. No-one has to give reasons for anything.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 350.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.8K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.8K Life & Family
- 257K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards